Classical philosophy and Darwinian biology are far more compatible than is usually assumed. In fact, looking at either from the standpoint of the other can enrich and deepen our appreciation of both. From a Darwinian point of view, the theories of Plato and Aristotle deserve to be taken very seriously. From the classical point of view, Darwinian biology is much less reductionist than its enemies suppose.

Friday, December 14, 2012

Three Kinds of Teleology

Whenever the explanation of
some process or characteristic involves a goal or purpose at which it aims or
which it serves, that explanation involves teleology.

Teleological explanations fall
into three large categories, distinct by their range and principles.For the moment I will call them theological,
evolutionary, and biological.

Theological teleology assumes a
Theos or God who designs the universe
and all that is in it with some purpose in mind.God hangs the sun and the moon in the sky in
order to provide a guiding light for man and His other creatures, as we read in
the book of Genesis.

Evolutionary teleology does not
necessarily depend on any theological assumptions.It argues that the processes by which the
Kosmos and life on earth emerge and develop are goal directed.Nature as a whole is striving for
something.Any account of life that
involves goals on a species level falls into this category.

Biological teleology simply
recognizes that organic processes involve constant correction towards
predetermined ends and that many traits of organisms can only be understood by
their function.

Natural theology, such as that
presented by Thomas Aquinas, includes all three.Natural theology is perfectly compatible with
mechanical accounts of biological causation.God does not necessarily have to intervene in the course of ontogeny if
He so designed an individual organism to develop in a certain way.

Aristotle recognized the second
type of teleology.He argues, in On the Generation of Animals, that the persistence
of each species is the result of a striving toward the divine.Whereas Divine beings are eternal, organisms
admit of being and not being.Individual
organisms cannot escape this limitation, but the species can.So, human beings cannot be eternal (and hence
divine) numerically; however, the human being can be so, in the way that is
open to it, genetically.

Aristotle also recognized biological
teleology.Organisms develop and act
toward certain ends and have traits that are explained by their function. This is the only kind of teleology that is
recognized by modern biological science.While Aristotle’s view of the species/individual dichotomy is largely
consistent with modern biology, his evolutionary teleology has no
purchase.Evolution is not a goal
directed process, as Darwinian biology understands it.

Theological teleology is
necessarily outside the realm of science.This is so not because of a lack evidence for God’s designing mind in
the work of creation.One may or may not
take seriously such arguments as the appeal to cosmological constants as such
evidence.The problem is that the Theos
is too powerful an explanatory factor.An omnipotent God can do anything and therefore He explains
everything.For that very reason, He
explains little or nothing in a scientific sense.

It is probably a good thing
that evolutionary teleology has been dispensed with.While Aristotle’s version was benign, modern
versions have underwritten such deplorable doctrines as Social Darwinism.Evolutionary teleology has tended to be
authoritarian.Only retrograde people
oppose the direction of evolution.

Biological teleology helps us
to understand why we care about what we care about.It leaves us free to care most about what we
should care about: living the best human lives individually and
collectively.If my love for my children
is in large part a product of an evolutionary process by which my genes have
managed to keep in play, fine.Rejecting
evolutionary teleology, I don’t have to give a rat’s ass about my genes.I am free to care about my daughter and my
son.